text:
The following is a rush transcript of the March 25, 2012 edition of "Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace." This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
CHRIS WALLACE, HOST: I'm Chris Wallace.
As November draws closer, battle lines are drawn between the two parties -- on high gas prices and how Washington spends our money.
President Obama travels the country pushing his "all of the above" energy policy. We'll discuss that with White House senior adviser David Plouffe.
Then, a different vision for getting America back on track and a new budget from House Republicans. We'll go inside of the numbers on taxes, spending and reforming Medicare when we sit down with House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan.
Plouffe and Ryan on "Fox News Sunday."
Plus, Obamacare gets its day in court. We'll ask our Sunday panel what are the chances that the Supreme Court will strike down some of the landmarks law's controversial provision.
And the frontrunner for GOP nomination gets shaken up on the trail.
All right now on "Fox News Sunday."
WALLACE: And hello, again, from Fox News in Washington.
We'll talk with our guests in a moment. But first, some late news. Former Vice President Cheney is recovering in a Virginia hospital after undergoing a heart transplant Saturday. The 71 year old who suffered five heart attacks was on the transplant list for almost two years.
Now, the results from Saturday's Republican primary in Louisiana. Rick Santorum came on top with 49 percent. Mitt Romney was second with 27 percent. While Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul rounded out the field. A look at the updated delegate count shows Romney with 568 delegates, almost halfway to the 1,144 needed for the nomination.
But now, let's turn to some of the issues that will define the general election, between President Obama and whoever the Republican nominee is.
Joining us here in the studio is President Obama's senior adviser David Plouffe.
And, Mr. Plouffe, welcome back to the "Fox News Sunday."
DAVID PLOUFFE, PRESIDENT OBAMA'S SENIOR ADVISER: Thanks for having me, Chris.
WALLACE: During the 2008 campaign, President Obama blamed President Bush for the rise of gas prices on his watch. Let's watch.
THEN-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA: Here in Ohio, you are paying $3.70 for gas, and that's because it going down over the last couple weeks, two and half times what it costs when George Bush took office.
WALLACE: Using that same logic, how responsible is President Obama now for the gas prices more than doubling since he took office?
PLOUFFE: Well, the point is, Chris, that you, we have gone through this just about every year now, in some respect, we have been dealing this for decades. It's got more pronounced in the last few years as you see increase from countries like China and India.
So, what the president has been saying and said (INAUDIBLE) saying it now, we have to do everything we can here to produce oil and natural gas here in this country. And we're doing that. Production is at an eight-year high, triple the rigs in the fields as there was when the president came to office.
But that's only part of the answer. We have to then quickly move to wind, and solar and biofuels, and next generation cars. It's why the fuel efficiency standards that the president arranged with the automakers are so important. At this point in the next decade, the average car is going to get 56 miles a gallon.
It means we're going to continue to lead in innovation in the automotive field. It means the average person is going to save $8,000, and we're going to save billions of dollars. So, this is a long-term project. We've got to do everything we can and we're making a lot of progress. But, obviously, we're not going to get the energy future we need until we have that "all of the above" strategy.
WALLACE: Well, I want to pick up on that because as you say, the president likes to say and has said this week on the campaign trail -- yes, the campaign trail, that's what it is -- he supports an "all of the above" strategy. Take a look.
OBAMA: Now, under my administration, America is producing more oil today than any time in the last eight years.
WALLACE: The Congressional Research Service says, about 96 percent of the increase since 2007 took place on nonfederal lands. And the CRS says oil production on federal lands actually fell in 2011.
So, isn't the president taking credit for production he has had almost nothing to do with it?
PLOUFFE: No, we are -- we are aggressively permitting as you know. And, you know --
WALLACE: That increase he talks about was on non-federal. It's not federal land.
PLOUFFE: We have 13 percent increase on federal lands in terms of permitting. We make auctions -- we just had an auction in the Gulf of Mexico. We made I believe 20 million acres available. The private sector only claimed three or four of that.
So, we're making a lot. But it's the private sector decision whether they want to, in an auction, purchase and then begin to explore and drill. So, we are -- if you look at what we are doing on- shore and offshore, natural gas -- we are doing everything we can.
But this isn't just about, you know, a political slogan that said I have a secret plan for $2 gas. We are not going to have the future we need.
And the American people understand this. They are tired of being given a bunch of Washington talking points. They say if only a politician would do one thing differently, we magically have cheaper gas. They know we need to use less, we need to diversify, we need to do everything we can here.
And we are getting more energy independent. We are producing more here. We are on track to double the sources of energy we get from renewable. So, we are making progress.
We just got to make sure that we really double down here to make sure that -- if all we do is drill and say, let's let China command the wind industry, the solar industry, we're going to not going to like (ph) the center very much here economically.
WALLACE: Well, you say you are doing everything you can. I want to talk to you about a specific area where a lot of people say you're not doing everything you can. The president went to Oklahoma to make a big show about the fact that he was calling for faster construction of the southern leg, the southern part, of the Keystone pipeline.
But he's basically, and you can see the map here, the southern leg, which is highlighted, it's basically irrelevant for that part, which is controlled by the states that it crosses, and what people are really concerned about is the northern leg, the part above the highlighted area.
The State Department and the EPA studied that for three years and came to the conclusion -- I want to get the quote right -- no significant impacts for the project from the U.S.-Canadian border past Nebraska down to Oklahoma.
Given that, why did the president delay that project past the November election?
PLOUFFE: Well, first of all, the southern part of this pipeline is pretty important because of the production --
WALLACE: I know. But the president doesn't have that much to do with it?
PLOUFFE: There are some permits that the Corps of Engineers and others will have to be done. Our point is, we're going to expedite this, because production is going so well in this country, there is a glut of oil in that section of the country. So, we need to get that oil to market. So, that pipeline is important.
We have approved a dozen of pipelines in this administration. And let's be clear, the governor of Nebraska, a Republican governor, Republican legislators in Nebraska, people throughout the state, had a problem with the pipeline route going through an aquifer. They raised objections, said the permit shouldn't be approved.
WALLACE: Governor Heineman is on record as saying now, start the pipeline, we will route -- right the pipeline around the sand hills area. Go ahead. We're not holding this up.
President Obama is.
PLOUFFE: There's going to be -- the company itself has said they're going to be submitting a new pipeline route. That ought to be reviewed. It ought to be reviewed expeditiously. The politics at this point --
WALLACE: It was reviewed for three years.
PLOUFFE: Well, and issues were raised with the water source in Nebraska. The people of Nebraska are deeply concerned about that.
WALLACE: But they're fine with it now.
PLOUFFE: Now, they're not fine with it.
WALLACE: They're fine with the idea of going ahead and they say it will be fixed by the time they get to Nebraska.
PLOUFFE: The company that's going to build this project said, wait, we're going to put through an entire route from Canada down to Oklahoma and then that will be reviewed. So, every -- you know, listen, the Republicans play games with this, said, even though there's concerns in Nebraska, let's kind of forget about them, let's just play politics.
And I think that the American people understand, who do you trust more on your energy future? Somebody who believes that we have to do everything we can here in a safe and responsible way on oil and gas, but someone who also believes in diversifying new forms of energy.
And sadly, Chris, this used to be a very bipartisan idea, alternative energy. Sadly, the Republicans running for president, many Republicans here in Washington, kind of vilify this, almost mock it.
And it's only going to determine our future. It's a very dangerous thing.
WALLACE: Will the president release oil from the nation's strategic petroleum reserve?
PLOUFFE: Well, we've obviously -- we've spoken of this before. I'm not going to make news here today. It's obviously an option that's always on the table. It was used last year because of the situation in Libya.
WALLACE: Is it something that the White House actually considering?
PLOUFFE: Well, obviously, we are always mindful of what's going on in terms of the oil market. I don't -- I'm not going to make any news today obviously. But it's something -- we are monitoring everything.
We are monitoring some of the pipeline issues out there. Some of the refinery issues out there, some of the distribution issues. Obviously, we are monitoring the supply issues.
Obviously, the sanctions in Iran are working very, very well. They are crippling sanctions, hurting their oil industry, hurting their central bank, hurting their economy and a lot of pressure on them.
WALLACE: What makes you think if you were to do it -- if you were to release from strategic petroleum reserve, that it would be anymore effective in lowering the price of gas, of oil and gasoline than it was last year during the Libyan operation?
PLOUFFE: Well, again, I'm not going to get any hypotheticals about something we may or we may not do. The question is generally this has been whether it was done in 2005 and it was done last year, when there's a determined supply disruption that needs to be filled by the United States and other countries.
Last year, it was a global response, contribute some oil to relieve that. It's really about the supply. No one should expect there's any magic bullet out there that's going to all of a sudden drop gas prices.
WALLACE: So, you would not do it unless there was an interruption in supply. You wouldn't do it just because prices are high?
PLOUFFE: No, but there is right now. That's right. There are some supply issues right that are contributing. You've got some issues in Sudan. You've got -- obviously, Libya is not up to where it was, pre-crisis.
So, so there is some supply disruption right now. But, no, this is about supply.
WALLACE: All right. Let's turn. The Supreme Court holds three days of hearings on Obamacare starting tomorrow. According to a recent poll, 67 percent of Americans think that the court should strike down the entire law, or at least the individual mandate.
WALLACE: Question, two years after it was passed, why is Obamacare still so unpopular?
PLOUFFE: Well, listen, you see a lot of polls on this, as do I. Polls also say that people don't want to start over. They want to refight this political battle. What they want us to do is implement this law smartly, make changes as we should, give states more flexibility.
But listen, I'm convinced at the end of the decade, the Republicans are going to regret turning Obamacare because when the reality of health care is in place. Most of the law doesn't take effect until 2014.
But important parts are getting implemented right now. Two and half million people between the ages of 21 and 26 have health care only because of the health care law. Over 5 million seniors are getting over $600 in prescriptions drug relief.
You've got women now treated equally, not being billed more. Preventive care like mammography in place.
So, for people who are experiencing it and it's a small portion of the population right now, I think they are seeing it quite differently than was advertised.
WALLACE: How confident are you that the Supreme Court is going to uphold the individual mandate.
PLOUFFE: Well, you've seen jurists appointed by both Democrats and Republicans in lower courts that uphold this law. Two very important conservative jurist offering very strong opinions. We're confident it will be constitutional.
And our focus right now, obviously, there's going to be a process play out this week, and the Supreme Court will deliberate. We're going to continue to make sure we implement this law smartly and that we inform people of the benefits that are available to them.
WALLACE: Congressman Paul Ryan, who will be here in the next segment, came out with new budget this week and the White House, including you, immediately started hammering him.
I want to show you a graph that was put up in the New York Times. Let's take a look at it. Under the Ryan budget, the deficit -- the Ryan budget, the deficit in 2016 is $241 billion. Under the Obama plan, it's $529 billion. Under Ryan, added debt over the next 10 years is $3.1 trillion. Under Obama, it's $6.4 trillion.
And the Ryan plan balances the budget by 2040. The Obama plan balances the budget never.
Say what you will, but at least the Ryan budget does addresses our national debt.
PLOUFFE: Well, first of all, we haven't seen all the details. There's a lot of I think that's been described as a lot of candy, not a lot of vegetables. So, we'll see in reality.
But, listen, the Ryan plan, which, by the way, supported by the presidential candidates. Mitt Romney, who's the front runner --
WALLACE: Right.
PLOUFFE: -- this is really the Romney-Ryan plan. It will be rubber stamped if Mitt Romney is elected president. It failed the test with balance of fairness and shared responsibility. And it showers huge tax cuts on millionaires and billionaires paid for by seniors and veterans.
WALLACE: Well, you don't know that.
PLOUFFE: Yes, we --
WALLACE: You don't know what they're going to take away in tax deduction.
PLOUFFE: Well, independent analysts who looked at this say there's going to be tax cuts for the wealthy.
WALLACE: No one knows that, David, because they don't know the tax deductions are going to be taken away.
PLOUFFE: I think most people believe that's a conservative estimate, that the average millionaire will get at least $150,000 tax cut. So, the right approach is the president's approach, which is whether it's Bowles-Simpson --
WALLACE: Even though it does nothing to address the national debt?
PLOUFFE: Well, it gets the deficit on a very sustainable path. It cuts -- listen, this president already signed a law --
WALLACE: It never balances the budget according to the CBO.
PLOUFFE: In the next 20 years, it gets us on what most experts, most fiscal experts, consider the right fiscal path. It also allows our economy to grow. It doesn't strangle education. It doesn't gut investments in clean energy. So, it's the right path to grow the economy and reduce the deficit. This president also signed into law almost $2 trillion of spending cuts. We have to make sure we get -- how do we do the rest of the job? Well, we are going to have reform entitlements. But do it in the right way, not by voucherizing Medicare, but actually saving money in the system. And obviously, and responsibly get some Medicaid savings. Now, we also have to get some revenue primarily from the wealthy through tax reform.
WALLACE: OK. I want to switch subjects with you. We could go -- we'll have an opportunity to go on at great length on that throughout the campaign.
The president spoke out on Trayvon Martin this week. The unarmed black teenager who was gunned down by a neighborhood watch volunteer in Florida this week. Does the president consider this a race issue?
PLOUFFE: No, obviously, he spoke I think very powerfully about this as a parent. But any time a young person, any person but a young person, it's a tragedy, obviously. And I think you've seen people in both parties, and I'm sure independents across the country say roughly the same thing.
This is a tragedy. There ought to be investigations. There's investigations happening locally and in the federal level. And that's where I think where the focus needs to be on, sympathy for the family and make sure of thorough investigations.
WALLACE: But does he think race had anything to do with Trayvon Martin being killed?
PLOUFFE: I think he's -- I think he was speaking very emotionally and powerfully as a father. I think that's where the focus ought to be, which is no matter the gender or race, this is a tragedy anytime when a young promising person was taken from us. And we ought to make sure there's a thorough investigation.
WALLACE: Finally, I want to talk a little politics with you. Some would say we already have. The economy is growing and unemployment rate is fairly going down.
But I want to show you this chart. In the last 36 years, only three presidents seeking another term have been defeated. Unemployment under Gerry Ford was 7.8 percent. Under Carter, 7.5 percent. Under Bush 41, it was 7.4 percent.
Unemployment is now 8.3 percent. Why won't that almost necessarily beat Barack Obama?
PLOUFFE: Well, Chris, I've said since the day we are elected, we are going to have a tough election. It's gong to be close. We're clearly going to be governing a tough economy. Only the Great Depression rivals it.
So, I think it's been coming down what people sense of where we have been, and where are we going. And let's --
WALLACE: How about where we are?
PLOUFFE: Well, we've had in the last 24 months, just shy of 4 million jobs created, manufacturing at the strongest peaks of 1990s. We begin to see clean energy sector emerge that's going to make a big difference in terms of energy costs but also economy.
This president has us moving in the right direction. Unemployment is still too high. The middle class is still not --
WALLACE: You'd agree that no president since FDR has been reelected with unemployment as high as it will be under Barack Obama.
PLOUFFE: Yes, but I think you have to look at the context, which is we were almost in a Great Depression. And we're going to make history again, because what our opponents is going to offer is the same exact policies that led to the great recession -- let Wall Street write its own rules, shower the wealth with tax cuts and somehow hope that trickles down, not invest in things like education and clean energy. That is the recipe for what led to the great recession, people don't want to go back there.
They understand this president inherited a very tough decision, he made tough decisions, stabilized the economy, has use moving in the right direction, almost 4 million jobs in the last two years, and he's got the right vision for how to grow an economy that's built to last.
WALLACE: All right. We're going to have to leave it there. Mr. Plouffe, thank you. Thanks for coming in. Please come back. Lots more to discuss. Always a pleasure to talk with you, sir.
PLOUFFE: I'll be happy to, Chris.
WALLACE: Up next, we'll get a Republican view on a number of these issues from the House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan.
WALLACE: This week, the House is expected to debate and pass the budget committee's new fiscal blueprint for the nation. And while Democrats are sure to block it, the GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney has endorsed it, insuring the House budget will be a central issue in the fall campaign.
The author of the plan, Paul Ryan, joins us.
And, Congressman, welcome back to "Fox News Sunday."
REP. PAUL RYAN, HOUSE BUDGET CHAIRMAN: Thanks for having me back.
WALLACE: We want to drill down into the numbers with you and let's start with taxes. You would create just two tax rates -- 10 percent and 25 percent. And you've just heard David Plouffe say that would give the richest Americans a tax break of $150,000 a year or more. Your response, sir.
RYAN: We are taking away the shelters that people in the top brackets use. So, what we're saying is, clean up the past (INAUDIBLE), flatter, simpler, more competitive tax system.
And you have to remember, Chris, that eight out of 10 businesses in America, they file their taxes as individuals. The president saying the wants their top rate to go to high as 44.8 percent in January. You can't compete like that. Canada just lowered their business tax to 15 percent.
So, we're saying get rid of all the special interest, loopholes and tax shelters that are disproportionately used by those higher income earners, get rid of those tax shelters, so you can lower tax rates for everybody, and make us better wired for economic growth and job creation.
WALLACE: OK. I just want to make sure that we are clear on this. But what you're saying is lower the tax rates --
RYAN: And broaden the base.
WALLACE: -- and broaden the base by eliminating a lot the tax --
RYAN: Loopholes and deductions, which are disproportionately used by those taxpayers.
WALLACE: Because you don't say in the budget, which ones?
RYAN: That's right. So, that's what the Ways and Means Committee is supposed to do. That's not the job of the Budget Committee. What we're saying is we want to do this in the light of day. Not in some backroom deal. We want to have hearings in the Ways and Means Committee that Chairman Dave Camp has already started this work, to say what tax benefits should go, which ones are the ones where Washington is picking winners and losers, so we get to a cleaner flatter tax code.
The point I would make, Chris, the president is proposing higher tax rates and more loopholes, more complexities of the tax code, which is contrary to this bipartisan consensus that we are seeing evolve in this country. There are Democrats who agree with us. Lower the tax rates. Broaden the base for economic growth and that's what we're proposing.
WALLACE: But if you can't tell me and I'm going to get in to these specific tax breaks in a moment, how much -- and you would know this, I would think, as the budget, because according to the CBO estimate -- lowering the rates --
RYAN: Right.
WALLACE: -- is going to -- from current policy, would cost $10 trillion.
RYAN: So --
WALLACE: Let me just finish, over the next 10 years. So, the question is -- how much are you going to need to bring in in closing tax loopholes, tax expenditures per year?
RYAN: So, we can bring in the same amount of revenue the government raises today with this kind of a tax system. There's $1 trillion of these kind of loopholes that are built in the tax system.
RYAN: You don't have to get rid of all of them for this kind of tax structure, you don't have to get rid of all them. You do have to get rid of a lot of them in order to get this kind of tax structure.
WALLACE: Can you give me a number?
RYAN: I can't because we -- those decisions haven't been made because you have to decide where those tax rates apply. The point I'm trying to make is, Bowles-Simpson commission proposed a top rate of 23 percent. We are saying 25 percent.
And we're saying you can still keep some of those middle income tax write-offs for people in this kind of a tax structure. And what we want to do is have a dialogue with the country, with the American people through hearings and an open process to find out what kind of a tax system we want to have while we simplify the code and get better us prepared for growth.
WALLACE: OK. I just want to get on this one more time because the Congressional Research Service looked into what are the major tax breaks and how much they are currently costing the Treasury. And let's put them up on the screen, exclusion of employer provided health insurance from taxable income, $164 billion. Exclusion of employer provided pension from taxable income, $163 billion. Home mortgage deduction, $100 billion. Lower tax rate on capital gains, $71 billion.
All right. I understand, this is not your committee, it's the Ways and Means Committee, can you tell me any one of those four that you're willing to say, do away with it?
RYAN: What I would say is doing away, who we do it for. And what we're saying is the people who disproportionately use those, it's the top two tax rate payers use almost of those tax expenditures.
We would limit these things to those higher income earners.
WALLACE: Even things like the deduction for health insurance and pensions and home mortgage?
RYAN: Yes, right. Instead of giving these write-offs, the people in the top tax bracket, take those tax shelters away. For every dollar that's parked in the tax shelter is taxed at zero. Take away the tax shelter, subject all of their income to taxation, you get more revenue and we can lower everybody's tax rate in return. So, we're saying let's limit these kinds of deductions to the higher income earners so that everybody can enjoy lower, flatter tax rate.
WALLACE: Are you willing to say that it would not only be revenue neutral, but also distributionally neutral, which means that the wealthy aren't going to benefit and the middle class isn't going to suffer.
RYAN: I don't know. There is no way to know the answer to that question. But we do believe in a progressive taxes and that's why we have two rates: 10 percent tax rate for low and middle income earners, 25 percent tax rate for higher earners, whether it's distributionally the same as the current code, it's impossible to answer that question.
WALLACE: OK. Let's turn to spending. You would cut Medicaid and other health programs by $770 billion more than the president's budget over 10 years. You would cult entitlements like welfare, food stamps and agriculture subsidies by $2 trillion over the next 10 years.
The White House says you look at that, and you are putting the burden for balancing the budget on the backs of the poor.
RYAN: Couple of things. Number one, these programs still grow. Number two, right now, they are growing at an unsustainable rate. So, we've seen a 400 percent increase in food stamp program, and that doesn't even account for the recession.
The other point I would make is this: is your job or goal to treat the symptoms of poverty, to make it easier to live with, or is the goal to eradicate poverty by treating the root causes?
What we want to do is have welfare reform that gets people off of lives of deficiency and onto to lives of self sufficiency. That's why we couple this with job training programs and work requirements. We think we ought to make sure that we get people out of the cycle of poverty and, unfortunately, I think the plan that we have in place, the president's agenda creates more of a dependent culture, creates people that are stuck in poverty because it denies the idea of upward mobility.
So, to me, this is a critical difference about repairing the safety net and making it a system that gets people back on their feet. And that's why --
WALLACE: I can understand that when it comes to welfare and food stamps, that you are saying you don't want to continue the cycle of poverty. What about something like Medicaid? People get sick.
RYAN: People get sick, but Medicaid is already going bankrupt. Medicaid is already a program that so many doctors won't even take anymore because of its federal rules and regulations and mandates. So, we're saying let's block grant Medicaid back to the states, allow the states to customize this benefit, to meet the particular needs of their populations. And yes, it will still grow under the program that we are talking about. But we will free the states to experiment and make sure that they can customize this benefit to the needs of their population.
WALLACE: I want to pick up on that because you and all of the presidential candidates are saying, let's take Medicaid. And a lot of these programs, and turn them into block grants and give them to a state.
But there was a new study that just came out and I want to put it up on the screen. This was a study of the way that state governments do business. Nineteen of the states got a C; 18 got a D; eight got a F. And there was not a single A.
And, look -- I mean, I've have been around. I've covered state politics. What do makes you think that states are going to be any better, anymore efficient, any less corrupt in doing this than the federal government?
RYAN: All the answers don't lie in Washington. The genius of America does not lie in our bureaucracy in Washington.
WALLACE: They don't lie in the state's capital either.
RYAN: The government closer to you is government more responsive to you. We believe in the principle of government by consent of the governed. And we believe that innovative reforms, like welfare reform in the '90s. Tommy Thompson was trailer blazer of this in Wisconsin and we made it very successful.
So, we think we should return with the 10th Amendment, responsibility to the states with these issues so that state government which is closer to the people who are involved in these programs can be held accountable and can cause solutions.
It's a diverse country. You know, the problems they have in New York state aren't exactly the problems we have in Wisconsin. So, we shouldn't have all these federal rules and regulations that treat us the same with cookie cutter mandates.
WALLACE: Then there's Medicare. And as you predicted when you announced your budget, Democrats, and you heard it again today from David Plouffe, are hammering you, saying you're going to destroy Medicare?
VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: We'd be so much better off as a country if we spend a lot less time and energy fighting off these efforts to dismantle Medicare. And I mean dismantle it.
WALLACE: The Congressional Budget Office says under your plan, by 2030, average government spending on each new Medicare enrollee would be $2,000 less than status quo. Wouldn't you just -- factually, wouldn't you make seniors pay more for Medicare and their health care than they do now?
RYAN: Those same numbers apply to President Obama's healthcare law. Medicare grows at the same -- under our budget as it does under Obamacare. Here is the key critical difference: the president's health care puts 15 bureaucrats in charge of Medicare. We put 50 million seniors in charge of their Medicare. He is putting these bureaucrats, unelected, unaccountable, in charge of price controlling, which leads to denied care for seniors. We are saying get rid of the health care law, stop putting this rationing board in charge of current seniors health care, give them the guaranteed benefits that they organize their lives around. Don't change their benefits for anyone in and near retirement.
But in order to make good on that promise, which is becoming a broken promise on the status quo, you have to reform for the next generation. And there's a bipartisan consensus on how best to reform it. And that's what we include in our bill. We save and strengthen the program.
The current law makes it go bankrupt and puts this board of 15 bureaucrats in charge of price controlling which will lead to denied care for current seniors.
WALLACE: Mitt Romney was on Capitol Hill this week, and you and other Republican leaders met with him. First of all, does he have the nomination wrapped up? And is it time for the party to unite around Romney, stop fighting amongst themselves and take the fight to Barack Obama?
RYAN: I don't know if he has it wrapped up now. I don't -- we're pretty relevant in Wisconsin. Now, we haven't had a relevance in Republican primary since I think Bush and Reagan.
WALLACE: Yes. Of course, you're not going to say that before April 3rd.
RYAN: Yes. Right. I don't know if I'd say he has it wrapped up. He's clearly on his way. I this he is becoming the prohibitive front runner.
And I think the sooner we coalesce around the nominee, the better off we're going to be, because, you know, the prize is November, not this summer. And I think that it's coming together. But, you know, I'll let the people of this country decide and these primaries --
WALLACE: Do you think some of these candidates, Santorum, Gingrich should consider --
RYAN: I'm not going to get into telling these guys what to do.
WALLACE: All right. One last question, one last try, you made it clear early on, you were very straight, you not running for president. I never hear you saying on this show. I want you to be just as straight now. If the nominee of the party, whoever it turns out to be, comes to you next August and says, "Paul, your budget is the budget; I want you to be the point man for getting this through; will you be my running mate?"
RYAN: Well, I'm already the point guy for doing this in the House.
WALLACE: Well, you'd be more powerful as the vice president.
RYAN: Well, who knows about that? I just don't know the answer to your question, Chris. It's not a bridge that I've even come close to crossing. It's a decision that somebody else makes and a long time from now.
And quite honestly, I'm focused on doing my job in Congress, which I think is important, which is to give the country an alternative choice of two futures on how we save and strengthen America, how we save the American dream from what I think is this path that the president's put us on to debt and decline.
So I don't -- I can't answer that question because I haven't given enough thought to that. I don't know if I'll even have the opportunity.
WALLACE: You're leaving the door open? You're saying, if I were asked, I would have to consider it?
RYAN: I would have to consider it, but it's not something I'm even thinking about right now because right -- I think our job in Congress is pretty important. And what we believe we owe the country is, if we don't like the direction the president is taking us, which we don't, we owe them a specific sharp contrast and a different path that they can select in November. And doing this in Congress is really important.
RYAN: And that's why I think I have a good job right now that helps contribute to this effort.
WALLACE: Real quickly, the White House sounds like they've already made the ticket. You heard David Plouffe talking about the Romney-Ryan budget.
RYAN: We're going to give the country a choice. Now, we're going to show the country, here's how you balance the budget, pay off the debt, grow the economy and stop all the cronyism in Washington, picking winners and losers. Here's how you get an upward-mobile society; here's how you get people back to work instead of being on government dependency.
These are the decisions we're going to have to make this fall, and that's why I think this job in Congress that I have right now is pretty important in doing that.
WALLACE: Congressman Ryan, we want to thank you so much for making time for us. Please come back, sir.
RYAN: Thanks, Chris.
WALLACE: Up next, our Sunday group on the extraordinary hearing starting Monday in the Supreme Court on whether Obamacare is constitutional.
REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF., HOUSE MINORITY LEADER: We believe in what we did; we did it carefully so that it would honor our Constitution.
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL, R-KY., SENATE MINORITY LEADER: Two years after its passage, Americans have now come to their own conclusion. They don't like it; they think it's unconstitutional, and they want it repealed.
WALLACE: Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi and Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell drawing the political battle lines ahead of this week's historic Supreme Court hearings on Obamacare.
And it's time now for our Sunday group, Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume; Kirsten Powers of The Daily Beast website; Paul Gigot of The Wall Street Journal and also the host of The Journal Editorial Report here on Fox News Channel; and Fox News political analyst Juan Williams.
Well, the big issue the court will have to consider this week is whether the individual mandate and individual, the idea that every American must get health insurance is constitutional. And it may well come down to the commerce clause, which you see up on the screen, Article One, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution, which states, "The federal government shall have the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among several states and with the Indian tribes." Brit, what are your thoughts? Does it fall within or outside the commerce clause?
BRIT HUME, FOX NEWS: Well, it's certainly true that the Supreme Court has granted Congress very wide latitude under the commerce clause to regulate things not only are in interstate commerce but may affect interstate commerce.
Famously, the court has ruled that it was constitutional to prevent someone from growing -- or penalize someone from growing a certain amount of wheat on his land.
The question here, though, it seems to me, is whether there are limits. And the court has certainly said there limits to Congress's power to legislate and regulate under the commerce clause.
And never before, to my knowledge, has Congress ever basically commanded that people enter into a contractual regulation of some kind. There's one argument that says to do that makes it a mandatory contract which dissolves any contract. It has to be voluntarily.
So I don't know what the court's going to do. I don't think anybody does. I'm astonished to read these commentators saying, oh, it's a slam dunk one way or the other. I don't think it is. I don't think they would set aside days of argument on this if it were.
But I think it is -- it will be approached as a novel question. This goes very far. And whether the court will permit it, I don't know.
WALLACE: You know, I want to pick up, Kirsten, on that, because to give a sense of how broadly the Constitution -- or, rather, the court has interpreted the commerce clause of the Constitution, let's look at the precedent that Brit just mentioned.
And this was, in 1942, a case called Wickard v. Filburn -- the court ruled unanimously that, under its quota for wheat at the time, the government could order a wheat farmer to destroy excess crops he was growing on his own farm and pay a penalty even though he said he was growing it for private use.
So that is a pretty broad interpretation of the commerce clause. He was growing it on his farm for his use.
KIRSTEN POWERS, THE DAILY BEAST: I think it's very broad, and I think people would be surprised by the case law actually of how often -- how broadly federal power has been extended.
And in terms of how it's going to turn out, I'd say the administration obviously thinks they have a strong case or they would not have gone ahead with it in an election year.
And their argument is that, because this affects such a large part of the economy, that it affects -- it affects the commerce clause -- affects commerce.
So the other case that they're -- that will come into play is Gonzales v. Raich.
WALLACE: Let me just -- now that you mentioned it, this is how prepared we are.
We didn't even know you were going to bring it up. Here's the Raich case. This is 2005. The federal government, the court said they ruled 6-3 that the federal government could destroy home-grown marijuana in California, which allowed medicinal marijuana, because it affected the interstate market.
POWERS: Right. So with home-grown marijuana is going -- we don't even know this person is going to sell -- they're just probably using it themselves -- is going to affect...
WALLACE: Well, it was. There was a woman who was sick and she said she was using it.
POWERS: Right, but it's going to affect interstate commerce. You can see how broadly this goes.
And what's important about that case is that both Scalia and Kennedy concurred with that opinion. And so people are looking at that and saying -- and this was brought up, I think, 10 times in the government's brief because they're really trying to move Scalia on this and they're really hoping for Kennedy to be their number five.
WALLACE: On the other hand, I see you wriggling in your chair -- squirming in your chair, Paul.
Make the other side of the case.
PAUL GIGOT, WALL STREET JOURNAL: Well, you don't have to overturn these cases to hold for the plaintiffs because these cases are different. The difference in this case, as Brit suggested, is that the government is saying we're going to compel you to participate in commerce in order to regulate you. It is not a case of growing wheat. It is a case you must buy this certain product, and if you must buy a certain product, then we can regulate you.
But that is a very different case. And that's an extension of the plaintiff's argument and I think right of the federal power, and extension beyond which the Commerce Clause never been justified by the Supreme Court.
And so I think it is it a novel issue, it's a very grave issue, because if you can compel -- if the federal government can compel individuals to participate in commerce, where do you stop? You can't stop at health care.
What about a car? What about Juan's books, as good as they are? Can you compel somebody to...
WALLACE: Let me just make the counter argument for the sake of argument, which is, with all due respect, you can live without reading Juan's books or, as some people talked about, broccoli. You don't have to eat broccoli. Sooner or later, everybody is going to use health care.
GIGOT: Well, how different is that than housing? How is that different from transportation? Most people in America need a car. All right? But you know what, I think I want you to buy a certain car because I like the Chevy Volt, the government likes the Chevy Volt, just like I think you need to buy a certain health care product.
We're going to mandate this product for you and you must buy that. Yes, just because somebody ultimately partakes of health care, just like the housing and other markets, we can't compel you to buy that product.
WALLACE: Mr. Justice Williams, would you like to respond to your colleague here on the bench?
JUAN WILLIAMS, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Certainly. I think that, you know, Justice Gigot needs to understand here that the uninsured aren't making an affirmative step, because their failure to buy insurance affects insurance markets in the country.
It drives up the cost of insurance for you, for me, for emergency rooms that have to treat people after they get smushed. And therefore has a tremendous effect on all of the (INAUDIBLE). This is a classic example that fits under the Commerce Clause.
And in fact, if you look at the record, I think four courts have looked at this, four of the appeals courts, three have said that is exactly right. It fits under the Commerce Clause. One has said it was premature. I guess that's a possibility (INAUDIBLE). They say, you know, the law is not fully in effect so we won't rule . But two of the courts have said, yes, this exactly fits, only one has said there is a problem.
WALLACE: All right. We have less than a minute left and I just want to turn to one last issue, and I want to hear what you have to say about this, Brit. And that is, what about the argument that the president and Congress debated this for a year and it certainly got a full hearing, that this would be judicial activism for the court to rule, and if the political side wants it (INAUDIBLE) there's going to be an election, all of the Republicans have made it clear they will repeal it, leave it to the political system, the court shouldn't step in?
HUME: Judicial activism is in the eye of the beholder and always has been, and it is not in the opinion of conservatives who have been the ones most concerned about judicial activism (INAUDIBLE) inappropriate or improper for the court to strike down a law that it believes is clearly unconstitutional. So I think the judicial activism argument is really kind of pointless.
WALLACE: OK, we're going to have to leave it there. And I -- did you use the word "smush"?
WILLIAMS: Yes.
WALLACE: Is that a legal term of art?
GIGOT: Yes, you will see it in Justice Kennedy's opinion.
WALLACE: All right. Thank you. And we have to take a break here. But when we come back, Rick Santorum gets a big primary win, but is it too little, too late?
RICK SANTORUM, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The people of Louisiana sent a loud and clear message. This race is long and far from over . And the people of Wisconsin, I would just say to you, "on, Wisconsin," let's get it done.
WALLACE: Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum celebrating his big win last night in the Louisiana Primary, and we are back down with the panel.
So how much should we make of Santorum's victory and of Romney's continued difficulty, Paul, in reaching out to voters in the South and to some of the conservative base of the party all across the country?
GIGOT: We should make something of it. It was a big win for Santorum. He needed that win badly. And he won in thoroughgoing fashion, I mean, 49 percent of the vote. I think he won in just about every demographic except for people who make more than a couple hundred thousand dollars a year.
So it was a repudiation, I think, of Romney, for his support in the South. Probably a little blowback too for the comment by his staffer, Eric Fehrnstrom, about Etch a Sketch, and now we'll just erase everything and start all over. It reinforced a lot of the doubts that conservatives have about Romney's real core.
But the problem for Santorum is he has got to win outside the South. And he is trying to make this into a replay of conservative 1976 Reagan challenge against the moderate. And to do that he has got to win in places other than Louisiana. He has got to win in Wisconsin. He has got to win in other states.
WALLACE: Which is a week from Tuesday.
GIGOT: And he hasn't shown that he has been able to do that so far. So he has got to deny Romney delegates, because Romney is just piling up those delegates.
WALLACE: Juan?
WILLIAMS: That is exactly right. I mean, if you look at the delegate count, he has more than twice the number -- that Romney has more than twice the number than Santorum does. April is not going to be a kind month to Rick Santorum. You go into...
WALLACE: Explain why.
WILLIAMS: Well, you go into places, especially towards the end of the month like Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, you know, I am not even sure if...
WALLACE: D.C., Maryland.
WILLIAMS: Right, Rhode Island. I think these are all more of the kind of traditional Republican liberal states that Romney does well, and upper income, more educated people. So then you have to go towards May, Chris. And then you get into hopefully...
WALLACE: Let me just say at the end of April you also have his home -- Santorum's home state of Pennsylvania.
WILLIAMS: I mentioned Pennsylvania. But I am not even sure how he would do there. You know, he is the hometown kid, but let's see, I am not sure if that state is favorably inclined towards him, especially if you look at the big cities, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.
But then you get into May, and there you could go back down South to places like North Carolina, you know, West Virginia, Kentucky, Texas is a big enchilada, if you will. That's what Santorum and, for a while, Gingrich had been hoping for.
That's his hope because delegates are what counts. All they're doing at this point is denying Romney the 1,144 he needs for the nomination.
HUME: This is a key point. Santorum continues to say that he could catch Romney. The odds of his doing that is exceedingly long, to say the least. So he's in this -- basically a position where all he can hope to do is to deny Romney the majority and force a contested or brokered convention.
That -- awareness of that will sink in with voters. And it is different matter to go out and vote for somebody you think can win and vote for somebody because you think they can keep the other guy from winning and extend the contest that I think is making Republicans increasingly nervous and anxious as we go forward.
So I think the odds for Santorum are very long indeed and this next month will only reinforce that. And the Romney delegate lead is bound to swell. I mean, this was -- everybody at this table is now saying this was a big win for him in Wisconsin (sic) last night. He gained...
WALLACE: Louisiana.
HUME: I mean, Louisiana, excuse me. He gained only a handful of delegates on Romney. If he was really going to have a chance to overtake him, he needs to get delegates and win them by the bushel while Romney is winning very few. And I just don't see that happening anytime soon.
WALLACE: So where is this race, Kirsten?
POWERS: Well, I think it's where we thought it was in the beginning, which is Romney is still the presumed front runner. He is far ahead in delegates. As Brit said, I mean, last -- in Louisiana, I think Santorum got 10 delegates to Romney's five delegates. And so what happens is in every state, regardless of who wins, even if Romney doesn't win, he picks up delegates. And so always stays ahead in the delegates. And he will win some of states that Juan is talking about.
I mean, look, Santorum is a real candidate. He has won 11 states. It's not a minor thing. You know, you have Newt Gingrich who has won two states telling him that he needs to drop out if he doesn't win Pennsylvania. But that's ridiculous.
In terms of him being sort of the 1976 Reagan conservative candidate, of course Reagan didn't win. So unless he is setting himself up for the future, which he very well could be, I think it is a long shot.
WALLACE: Well, how about the issue that Brit raised and the nervousness of Republican voters as this drags on, do you think Romney is being hurt by this process?
GIGOT: A little bit but not too much. I think in fact he's being helped, because he's being forced to put out a tax proposal that's better than the one he first proposed. His 59 points that no one remembers.
He's been forced to embrace more of the Paul Ryan budget. And the partial Ryan Medicare plan to put more substance on his agenda than just his biography as a business man, which is his instinct to run only on biography as a technocrat, a manager.
He's been forced by the campaign to put more meat on those bones. And I think that that will help him in the general election if he's willing to make the case for those ideas.
WILLIAMS: But I think the Etch-a-Sketch comment this week was just devastating to him, Paul. Because it played directly to this narrative that he is a man who doesn't have a core beliefs.
GIGOT: But it was a staffer and not Romney himself who said that.
WILLIAMS: Right, but I think it applies to Romney in the voter's mind. I suspect that's going to stick around.
WALLACE: I want to -- I want to -- in the time we have left to something else. You were talking about the Ryan budget. It was very interesting to me to hear David Plouffe, the White House adviser, make big deal of the fact that Romney had endorsed it and it was now the Romney-Ryan plan. And what's so interesting is both sides seem to think that the Ryan budget is a weapon on their behalf.
The White House thinks that this is going to show that Republicans stand for helping the rich on the backs of the poor. And Republicans think it's going to show that they are responsible in getting government out of the way.
HUME: Here's how this plays out, Chris. Democrats will argue that Romney has wholly adopted the radical Paul Ryan budget . Conservatives will say I don't. I don't think we can trust this guy. He's converted too late. He's an Etch-a-Sketch. He's -- so in a sense Romney can't win. I don't -- I think this is just talk really. I think the voters are going to have to make a decision at some point about this kind of action on entitlement spend this is what the 2010 election was about as to whether they are ready to support a candidate and a party that is prepared to do something serious about them. And I think that becomes a central issue in this race, good, because it needs to be. It is the central issue in this campaign.
President Obama has punted. No question about that. His budget doesn't do anything about it. So that's how it should be.
WALLACE: And Kirsten -- and we have about 30 seconds left. I mean, the flip side of that. Do you think that this is good grounds for Republicans? I mean, under the -- for Democrats, rather, under the president's budget he never balances the budget.
POWERS: Well, I mean, -- it is dangerous for Republicans because it is extreme in terms of the cuts that would have to happen to make this budget work. And I don't think there's been a lot of talk about that.
WALLACE: All right. We're going to have to leave it there. And maybe we'll talk about it coming up.
Thank you, panel. See you next week.
Don't forget to check out panel plus where we will talk about it when our groups picks right up with the discussion on our website FoxNewsSunday.com. And we'll post the video before noon eastern.
Up next, we do on the Trail.
WALLACE: This week we had two primaries, one big endorsement and a toy from the '60s, all making headlines On the Trail.
ROMNEY: Each day we move closer not just to victory but to a better America.
JEB BUSH, FORMER FLORIDA GOVERNOR: At some point we need to unify behind our candidate, and I believe that the best candidate is Mitt Romney.
ERIC FEHRNSTROM, ROMNEY CAMPAIGN: Well, I think you hit a reset button for the fall campaign. Everything changes. It's almost like an etch-a-sketch, you can kind of shake it up and we start all over again.
SANTORUM: You're not looking for someone who is the etch-a-sketh candidate. You're looking for someone who writes what they believe in in stone and stays true to what they say.
ROMNEY: I'm running as a conservative Republican. I was a conservative governor. I will be running as the conservative Republican nominee, or at that point hopefully, nominee for president.
SANTORUM: We win by giving people the opportunity to see a different vision for our country, not someone who's just going to be a little different than the person (inaudible).
GINGRICH: To suggest that a Romney presidency would not be dramatically better for any conservative than an Obama presidency is just plain wrong.
SANTORUM: Everybody knows full well my passion about defeating Barack Obama. Over my dead body would I vote for Barack Obama.
GINGRICH: This is either going to be Romney or an open convention. I mean, Santorum is not going to get to 1,144 and I'm not going to get to 1,144. Ron Paul is not going to get to 1,144.
ROMNEY: You got a lot of delegates here, all right? I want -- well, I'd like all of them. I'm probably not going to get all of them, but I want to get as many as I can.
WALLACE: But the candidates got a bit of a break. We have to wait until the first Tuesday in April, nine days from now, for the next round of primaries. That's it for today. Have a great week. And we'll see you next "Fox News Sunday."
Content and Programming Copyright 2012 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2012 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.


text:
I want to share one of my experiences with corporal punishment during my high school years in a medium size Texas town. I had been paddled by teacher in the hallway a couple of time and while it was pretty embarrassing and it stung a bit it wasn't all that bad a price to pay for the infraction and parents weren't notified if you were paddled by a teacher. I really didn't think that a paddling was a very big deal until I was sent to the principal's office for the first time.
After arriving at the office with my note from the teacher I gave it to the secretary and I was told to sit in the waiting area in the outer office. The secretary informed the principal that I was there and I waited for what seemed like forever (In reality it was probably only about 10 minutes).
The silence in the office was broken with the sound of a "pop". The sound was one that I was familiar with but for some reason in seemed different. There was a total of four "pops" and shortly after a boy who was a little older than me exited the office with the principal. I could see that the boy was crying as he walked out of the office and down the hall. Then I heard the principal call me name and I think that my heart stopped for a second. I followed him into the office and I sat down in a chair in front of his desk. I had been sent to the office for skipping school and I got the lecture on the importance of being in class and learning ect ect….
Then i was given the choice of 6 pops with the paddle or a two week suspension. I was a pretty good student and I knew that I wouldn't be able to pass all of my classes with the suspension. I asked if my parents would be notified if I took the paddle and I was told that they would not have to notified because I was 17 years old (In Texas you are considered an adult at 17).
I was given a couple of minute to think about my decision. I knew that it had to be the paddle but I couldn't say it until the asked me twice for my answer.
He then called in his secretary as a witness since I am a female and informed her my upcoming punishment. He got the paddled out of his desk drawer and began to walk around to my side of the desk. The paddle was varnished wood about 24″ long, 3/4 " think and about 4″ wide, it is a very intimidating instrument even before it has any real impact on you.
I was wearing a cotton dress that stopped just above the knees and a pair of cotton panties. They provided very little protection for my nice round bottom. I have a very nice round butt and I suddenly felt very uncomfortable sticking it in the air for this man to stare at and smack. I was told to stand up and bend over the desk.
I decided that I was going to take this paddling with a little attitude and without breaking down to show him it wasn't a big deal to me. I bent over the desk and I arched my back so that my bottom was jetting out round and full. I felt the paddled touch the lower part of my ass. The principal rubbed the paddled against my ass a couple of time. At this point I thought I was ready for the paddling. Then he rared back and the first pop came down.
I heard the pop connect with my lightly covered ass and it was immediately followed by the sharp burning on my bottom. It made me gasp, I wasn't as prepared as I thought. The feel of his paddle was much worse than I had excepted. I still thought I could show him though. I made sure my ass was sticking up good and me lined up delivered the second pop. The second pop made me lot out a whimper and my ass was flaming.
I then felt him place his hand in the small of my back and push it down so that my ass arched up nicely for him as it was before. He landed the third pop in the same spot as the first two and I began to openly cry. At this point I was caring too much about how I looked to him only how my ass was feeling.
He positioned me again and I stayed in position with my ass sticking up to accept the full force of the blow. After the 4th pop had landed I was bawling loudly and I couldn't stop. I had been broken and I didn't care about shame. He told me to stick my ass out good for the last one and that the last one would be one that I wouldn't forget for a long time. I was crying and my legs were shaking as I felt him line the paddle up for the finale. I tried to move my ass down so that it wasn't so exposed and he threatened me with an extra pop if I didn't get it stuck up and out and leave it there. I pushed my bottom up into good position for him and i waited.
As he swung the last pop I remember that I actually heard him grunt during the swing. When it connected it felt like it lifted my feet off the ground. I let out a scream and I laid there over the desk blubbering and crying with my hands clinched in a fist. When I was allowed to stand up after about 30 seconds my hands grabbed my ass and began rubbing it right there in front of him and the secretary. He signed my note and walked me to the front door and told me to go to class. The next thing I knew I was in the outer office, still crying, still rubbing my bottom. I was totally humiliated and i know that everyone was looking at me because they had heard the pops being given.
On the way to class I stopped and checked my bottom to find that it was a little bruised. I felt the results of this paddling for the next couple of days.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Vacation rentals - Hasle, Denmark
- Security Package
With this holiday cottage it is possible to arrive on all days of the week, not just Saturday, which is our usual arrival and departure day. You can thereby also decide on the length of your stay, as long as the house is also part of our 'short break' offer. Please be advised, that if you want to make use of this offer in the high season (A, B and C) you cannot book until 28 days before arrival.
This holiday cottage can be rented for 3, 4, or 5 days at reduced price. The discount when booking 3 nights is 20%, for 4 nights 15%, and when booking 5 nights you get 5% off the usual weekly price. The short break offer applies all year round, but cannot be booked until 28 days before arrival.
Here you save 8-10% when booking 2-3 weeks - All year round. - Save 8% when booking 2 continous weeks - Save 10% when booking 3 continous weeks
You are not allowed to smoke in holiday homes marked with this symbol. dansommer cannot guarantee, nor control that the smoking ban is upheld, but we expect all of our guests to do so.
Holiday homes marked with this symbol have an internet connection. The internet connection can be limited to a certain number of GB, or may be a paid connection. In the house description you can see which type of connection is offered (wireless, using a LAN cable or a USB etc.)
These holiday homes have quality garden furniture, so you can really enjoy the terrace or balcony. These houses have newer garden furniture from wood, aluminium, iron, wicker, or plastic. In case of iron or plastic furniture, there will usually be good quality cushions. The amount of garden chairs matches the allowed number of people for the holiday home. The houses will usually also have a barbecue, and at least at least one parasol pr. table. - Depending one the size of the house, there will also be sunchairs (does not apply to houses in Norway and Sweden): - Holiday homes for 2-5: 2 sunchairs - Holiday homes for 6-7: 3 sunchairs - Holiday homes for 8-9: 4 sunchairs - Holiday homes for more than 10 occupants: 5-6 sunchairs
Ïn holiday homes marked with this symbol you are not allowed to bring your pets. Please note, that these houses are not necessarily allergy free, as the owners can have had their own pet on the property.
- 117m2
- 8
- 5
- 0
House description
Rubinsø woodland homes A peaceful idyll deep in the forest These attractive holiday homes are situated in a large natural woodland beside the Rubinsø, an attractive forest lake. The houses themselves are light and tastefully decorated with modern, Scandinavian-designed furniture. They contain all that is needed for the perfect holiday, including a large, cosy living room combined with kitchen and dining room, where large partitioned windows allow you to enjoy the beautiful countryside all year round. Surrounding the holiday homes is the forest of Hasle Lystskov, which is home to a rich variety of bird life and a wealth of walking trails. For those interested in fishing, the Rubinsø is something of a goldmine for pike. The lake's stock is large, and so are the fish. Just a few minutes' walk from the holiday homes can be found a sandy, child-friendly beach complete with dunes and excellent opportunities for bathing. From here, you can experience the most fantastic sunsets over the Baltic Sea. Enjoy Hasle's unspoilt beauty The nearby town of Hasle is a charming old fishing settlement located on sloping land that rises up from the cosy harbour. The town is especially famous for its traditional herring-smoking plant, 'Hasle Silderøgeri' which functions as a working museum. Here, fish are smoked in the traditional method in open chimneys, meaning you can enjoy a meal of warm, freshly smoked herring while enjoying the most beautiful of sea views. Also in Hasle, you can visit Grønbechs Gård, a former merchant's house that is now home to the island's largest collection of art and crafts, as well as a working glass workshop. Both Hasle and Rønne, which is situated just 10 minutes' drive from the Rubinsø woodland homes, offer good shopping opportunities and numerous restaurants, cafes, galleries and museums. Bornholm: an abundance of experiences Many of Bornholm's magnificent attractions and natural sights can be found just a short distance from the Rubinsø woodland homes. Attractions include the 162-metre high 'Rytterknægten', the island's highest point topped by a tower in the attractive Almindingen forest. Lovers of nature cannot fail to be impressed by Bornholm's deep woodland lakes, large crevices and fantastic areas of natural beauty such as the 'Hammerknuden' to the north of the island, with its beautiful rocky coastline, waterfalls and rock caves. Further sights include Hammershus, the largest ruined castle in Northern Europe, the 'Helligdomsklipperne' (holy rocks) close to the town of Gudhjem, the 'Paradise Hills', home to the famous 'rocking stone' and round churches, and the small group of islands known as the Ertholms (with Christiansø as the most famous). In addition, Bornholm boasts many attractive bathing beaches, and, not least, famous man-made attractions such as the Bornholm Art Museum, the Joboland Amusement Park and Bornholm's Summer Bird Park and Tropical Land. The island's long lis
- House
- 117m2
- Building material:Wooden house
- 8
- 1999
- 1250m2
- 5 View all roomsHide all roomsBedroom (2 persons)1 x Double bedBedroom (2 persons)1 x Double bedBedroom (2 persons)2 x Single bedBedroom (2 persons)2 x Single bedMezzanine
- 2 View all roomsHide all roomsToiletWC: Hot and cold waterBathroomWC: Hot and cold water, Shower
- 1
- 1
- All year round insulated
- Electric heating
- Woodburning stove
- Other consumption costs excl.
- Garden furniture
- Barbecue
- Whirlpool bath (4 persons)
- Sauna
- Wireless internet
- Kitchen: Hot and cold water
- Electric cooker
- Refrigerator
- Cooker hood
- Freezer Box (20 l)
- Coffee brewer
- Microwave
- Washing machine
- Tumble dryer
- Dishwasher
- Cable TV, german channels
- Hi-Fi system/CD player
- 1 DVD player
- Playstation 2
- 1st floor
- 2nd floor
- Activity room
- Balcony
- Basement
- Bedroom
- Carport
- Door
- Fitness
- Ground floor
- Kitchen
- Living room
- North
- Not Available
- Sauna / steam bath
- Staircase
- Swimming pool
- Terrace
- Toilet / Bathroom
- Whirlpool
- Distance shopping:3 km
- Distance restaurant:3 km
- Distance water:500 m


text:
The Staff Development and Learning Section is committed to providing to our diverse clients high quality, state of the art, innovative and effective learning opportunities and organizational support.
In line with UN values and competencies, SDLS support individual and institutional growth and performance to meet organizational needs particularly in the context of ongoing change.
SDLS is charged with implementing the Organization's training and learning policy which is based on the principle that staff development is an ongoing process and priority and a critical investment for the future, for which the Organization, its managers and staff all share responsibility.
Staff members must play their part to develop and maintain their skills and competencies. Whatever their grade level or breadth of experience and whether a senior manager with years of service, or a recent recruit, all staff will find programmes appropriate to their needs.
SDLS runs more than 700 courses for more than 10 000 participants each year in the main areas of language training, management and communication, information technology as well as conducting testing and examination for recruitment.
Click here to see the 2017 January to August programme of courses and seminars.
For further information, please check the "Learning at UNOG" website.
Language courses are offered in the six official languages of the United Nations.
Address: Palais des Nations, 1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland. | P: +41 (0) 22 917 1234 | F: +41 (0) 22 917 0123 | E:firstname.lastname@example.com
Copyright | Terms and Conditions of Use | Privacy Notice


text:
"The digital tools that are available today blow what we had even five years ago out of the water," said Joseph Walla, HelloFax founder and CEO. "For the first time, it's easy to sign, fax, and store documents without ever printing a piece of paper."
San Francisco, CA (PRWEB) January 01, 2013
The paperless office has finally arrived. Led by HelloFax, a coalition of companies today launched Paperless 2013, a push to deliver free online tools to consumers and businesses that allow them to retire their printers and fax machines to the scrap heap.
When people pledge to go paperless at http://www.Paperless2013.org, they will receive an email with links to a set of web services that, used together, can remove the need for 'paper' from paperwork: HelloFax, Google Drive, Manilla, Xero, HelloSign and Expensify. HelloFax is offering an exclusive deal of 50 free fax pages per month.
"The digital tools that are available today blow what we had even five years ago out of the water," said Joseph Walla, HelloFax founder and CEO. "For the first time, it's easy to sign, fax, and store documents without ever printing a piece of paper. It's finally fast and simple to complete paperwork and expense reports, to manage accounting, pay bills and invoice others. The paperless office is here – we just need to use it."
"I hope many small business owners will join us in the Paperless 2013 pledge," said Xero President of U.S. Operations Jamie Sutherland. "Not only is it good for the environment, but the cloud saves time and money by streamlining and digitizing workflows, especially in the case of small business accounting."
"Manilla is excited to be a member of the Paperless Coalition and the Paperless 2013 campaign," said Jim Schniella, CEO of Manilla. "It's truly representative of Manilla's overall mission to simplify and organize people's lives, to help them to eliminate clutter, and to help improve the environment by reducing the overall use of paper."
"Between pockets full of crumpled receipts, stacks of expense report printouts, or long forgotten reimbursement checks stuffed in your wallet, paper makes expense reports suck at every stage," said David Barrett, CEO of Expensify. "We're excited to support Paperless 2013 to bring receipt scanning, online reporting, and direct deposit reimbursement to the masses."
The Paperless Coalition is:
Google Drive
Fujitsu ScanSnap
According to the US Environmental Protection Agency, the average US office worker uses 10,000 sheets of copy paper each year. In 2010, the amount of paper recovered for recycling averaged 334 pounds for each person living in the US, according to the American Forest & Paper Association.
The Paperless 2013 campaign can be followed on twitter using #Paperless2013.
About Google Drive
Google Drive is a cloud storage and collaboration service from Google. Drive allows people to store their files online and access them from any device: in desktop folders on Mac or PC computers, in mobile apps on Android or iOS devices, or from any web browser by visiting drive.google.com. Google Drive is available with 5GB of storage for free, and additional storage may be purchased.
Google Drive also allows people to create, edit and share files with one another. Google Drive applications are third-party applications that work seamlessly with Drive. By integrating with the user account and file data stored in Drive, these web applications provide a simple way for people to open files from Drive, make changes or edits in the application, and save the updated file. Drive applications are available in the Chrome Web Store.
Google, Google Docs, Google Drive are trademarks of Google Inc.
About HelloFax
HelloFax was founded in 2010 to bring simple and easy online faxing to everyday consumers. Today, HelloFax enables customers to send and receive faxes, complete forms and create tempates. In 2012 HelloFax launched its second business line, HelloSign, which is revolutionizing the electronic signature industry. See http://www.hellofax.com
About HelloSign
Created by the makers of HelloFax, HelloSign provides always free and easy to use electronic signatures. HelloSign combines the simplicity of a consumer product with business grade electronic signatures, empowering consumers and businesses alike to securely sign documents online. See http://www.hellosign.com
About Expensify
Expensify does "expense reports that don't suck!" by importing expenses and receipts from credit cards, email and mobile phones, submitting expense reports paperlessly, and reimbursing everything online with QuickBooks, PayPal and Direct Deposit. Expensify's unique design suits everybody from individuals tracking their personal finances to companies with a thousand employees, and everywhere in between. Expensify is free for individuals and small businesses, with premium upgrades available for receipt scanning and shared expense policies.
About Xero
Xero is beautiful, easy to use online accounting software for small businesses and their advisors. The company has over 110,000 paying customers and 200,000 users in more than 100 countries around the world. Xero's U.S. team is based in San Francisco. Xero is hosted with Rackspace in Texas. See http://www.xero.com/
About Manilla
Manilla organizes and simplifies people's lives by providing one secure access point to all household accounts and services. The free service helps consumers manage their household accounts, including financial accounts, utilities, subscriptions, daily deals, and travel rewards programs, all through Manilla.com. Consumers can also use all of the Manilla features on the go by using Manilla's 4+ star customer-rated Android and iOS mobile apps. Under a single password, Manilla gives customers an automated, organized view of all of their account information, text and email reminders to pay bills, renew expiring subscriptions, and manage soon-to-expire daily deals, all with unlimited storage and seamless document retrieval.
Manilla is a company incubated within and backed by Hearst Corporation. Manilla is the recipient of the 2012 Webby Award and People's Voice Award for Best Banking/Bill Pay Service. For more information, please visit http://www.manilla.com.
About Fujitsu Computer Products of America, Inc.
Fujitsu Computer Products of America, Inc. is an established leader in the Document Imaging industry, delivering innovative scanning solutions and services that enable our customers to solve critical business productivity issues and streamline operations. Fujitsu provides cutting-edge document capture solutions for business and personal environments, backed by a comprehensive portfolio of service and support programs. For more information about Fujitsu Document Imaging solutions and services, please call us at 800-626-4686.
For more information, please see: http://us.fujitsu.com/fcpa


text:
Hartsville, S.C. – Coker Softball opened their 2009 season with a win and a loss, as they split their double-header with Catawba College, wining game one 2-0 and losing game two 5-2. After the win and the loss, each team is 1-1 on the year.
In game one, the Lady Cobras scored a run in the third inning and a run in the fifth inning and that would be all the offense needed as Shelly Catlett (Orangeburg, SC) (1-0) shut down the Indians in a complete game shutout on the mound. Catlett allowed just five hits over seven innings of work with four strikeouts.
On the opposite side of the field, Meghan Cobb (0-1) took the loss, throwing six strong innings, allowing just two runs on six hits, with three strikeouts.
Miranda Klees (Murrells Inlet, SC) led the offense going 2-for-3 with a double and a run scored, while Anna Oswald (Lexington, SC) and Allie Bragg (Cassett, SC) were each 1-for-3 with Bragg driving in a run and Oswald scoring a run.
For Catawba, Kathryn Geouge was 2-for-4, while Allie Marshall and Carly Sabat were each 1-for-3.
In game two, Catawba jumped on the board early with two run sin the second inning, followed by a run in fourth, sixth and seventh inning for five runs, while they held Coker scoreless until the sixth inning, holding on for the 5-2 win.
Jamie Wells (1-0) threw a complete game for the Indians allowing two runs on four hits, while Sydney Greenwalt (Edwardsville, IL) (0-1) took the loss for Coker, allowing three runs on six hits.
The Indians were led at the plate by Callie Gordy, going 2-for-2 with two RBIs, while Allie Justice was 2-for-4 with a pair of runs scored. MacKenzie White, Cassie Markham and Brittany Murray each had an RBI.
For the Lady Cobras, Klees again led the way going 2-for-4, while Shannon Mitchell (Virginia Beach, VA) and Becky Dillion (West Palm Beach, FL) were each 1-for-3.
Coker returns to the diamond on Sunday, when they travel to Wingate for a non-conference double-header starting at 1:00 p.m.


text:
British police will be working with Brazilian officers to ensure there is no trouble from "dejected" English football fans during the country's last World Cup match.
England fans have been left in low spirits as the team crashed out of the tournament after losing their first two group matches against Italy and Uruguay.
But the team are set to hit the pitch again on Tuesday, where they will come up against surprise group leaders Costa Rica in Belo Horizonte.
A team of seven specialist officers from Britain have flown out to Brazil to help the South Americans with their policing ahead of the clash.
Paddy Cooper, a spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers, said they have not had any reports of unruly behaviour from England fans and expect the match to be peaceful - despite the fans' disappointment at England's early exit.
He said: "We are aware fans are feeling a bit low and dejected, but we have had no trouble from them so far. We are not anticipating any trouble from them at all.
"There have been no arrests so far."
He said English football had "turned a corner" and was shedding its once infamous reputation for violence and hooliganism.
He said this was "a testament" to measures such as Football Banning Orders, which weed out trouble-makers by banning them from matches at home and abroad if they are convicted of a football-related offence.
He said: "I think football has turned a corner. Obviously the reputation that exists from decades ago lingers because it was so serious, but we need to start putting that behind us.
"We haven't seen any of the sort of chaos we would have seen 20 or 30 years ago."
A team of seven specialist officers, led by Chief Superintendent Rachel Barber of South Yorkshire Police, have been in Brazil since the beginning of the tournament helping with policing and intelligence-gathering.
Sorry we are not currently accepting comments on this article.


text:
Vitamin D supplements don't prevent colds or ease their severity in adults without deficiency, a randomized trial showed.
The number of upper respiratory infections wasn't any lower with large monthly doses of vitamin D than with placebo, at a mean of 3.7 versus 3.8 per person, for a nonsignificant risk reduction of just 3 percent, Dr. David R. Murdoch of the University of Otago in Christchurch, New Zealand, and colleagues found.
Missed workdays and duration of symptoms likewise were similar between groups, they reported in the Oct. 3 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Sufficient levels appear to be enough, Murdoch's group concluded from its VIDARIS trial.
Read this story on www.medpagetoday.com.
Healthy adults in developed countries who are already keeping their vitamin D in the range recommended for bone health don't need an extra boost, Dr. Jeffrey A. Linder of Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston agreed in an accompanying editorial.
"The VIDARIS trial has rigorously addressed this question," he wrote. "Results suggest that vitamin D should join the therapies listed in the Cochrane reviews as being ineffective for preventing or treating upper respiratory tract infections in healthy adults."
That list with no or questionable benefit or significant side effects includes vitamin C, garlic, Echinacea, zinc, saline nasal irrigation, steam inhalation, increased fluid intake, and other popular strategies, Linder pointed out.
"It's very important, however, to keep in mind that this group had relatively normal levels to start with, and so this might not apply to people with lower levels, with actually a vitamin D deficiency," study co-author Dr. Carlos A. Camargo Jr. of Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston cautioned in an interview.
For example, in vitamin D-deficient children in Mongolia, a daily dose of the vitamin has been shown to have a dramatic impact, halving the incidence of upper respiratory infections.
Another trial in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease showed a benefit of supplementation in reducing exacerbations only in vitamin D-deficient individuals with levels under 10 ng/mL.
Vitamin D is appealing as a preventive treatment because of its role in immunity and inducing antimicrobial compounds in the body.
The VIDARIS trial randomized 322 healthy adults in New Zealand to double-blind treatment with 200,000 IU oral vitamin D3 initially and 1 month later followed by monthly doses of 100,000 IU monthly or placebo on the same schedule for 18 months, covering two winter seasons.
The extra vitamin D did boost levels from a baseline of 29 ng/mL to over 48 ng/mL throughout the study period. A level above 20 ng/mL is generally considered adequate for bone and overall healthy in adults.
Monthly office visits for dose administration and completion of questionnaires about "sudden onset of runny nose, nasal stuffiness, sore throat, or cough not attributed to allergies" were supplemented with a home visit for nasopharyngeal swab sampling any time a participant contacted study staff to report symptoms.
However, the primary endpoint of those upper respiratory tract infections didn't differ between the groups over the course of the study, nor were there any secondary benefits.
The number of days of missed work due to colds was the same in both groups, and the duration of symptoms averaged 12 days per cold in both groups. Severity scores were likewise similar between groups.
Nasal swabs showed no differences in the proportion that tested positive for respiratory viruses and no impact on the type of virus found either.
The trial avoided the shortcomings of the prior, inconclusive trials of vitamin D for cold prevention with its relatively long duration, larger sample size, and high dose of vitamin D, the researchers noted.
But it couldn't determine whether daily dosing would have been any better than monthly doses as used in the trial, they added. Prior studies have suggested different effects of vitamin D when given yearly versus every 4 months.
"However, it is purely speculative at this stage as to whether some conditions (e.g., infections) require a smaller steady dose of vitamin D supplementation for benefit," they wrote.


text:
Get Started
More Info
Contact Us
Member Login
August 20th: 52,357 Roommates Available
I just wanted to express my thanks to you guys for helping me find a "killer pad." I am moving back home and was going to spend loads of money to get my own apt. I chose to try Roommates.com, spent some time e-mailing prospects in respective filters that were easy to set up....MAN, WHAT A RESPONSE! I had a real choice on places, with pictures and everything...and I found a beautiful Italian Villa with a REALLY cool owner, the right price/deposit...and we have agreed on a deal! I am so excited to know that I have a place set up (that is beautiful) before I go out there and have to hotel it...spending twice as much whilst I look for a place and am busy working. Thank you sooooooo much! I owe so much to Roommates.com! - Jason
I just wanted to thank you for helping me find a roommate as soon as possible. I signed up on Sunday night and found a roommate by Thursday. I was really stressed and had no luck anywhere else, except here. I had so many responses and your service was so easy to use. I have told everyone I know about it. I even helped one of my friends find a roommate through this. Thank you so much! - Danielle
More testimonials...
Sorry, the profile that you're trying to access is currently unavailable.


text:
Crows in the Corners
Martha Stewart has good ideas.
Sometimes they just need some tweaking.
Here's my take on a cool way to display those feathery fiends you've collected for Halloween.
I am stealing this. Right
I am stealing this. Right the eff now. Consider it stolen.
Seriously marvelous.
Quoth the raven, never more.
Quoth the raven, never more. Frankly, I think they look better stuffed. Ha!
Post new comment


text:
Emily I. McKee, 90
Emily I. McKee, 90, of Rossiter, passed away on Thursday, July 18, 2013, at DuBois Nursing Home.
Mrs. McKee was born June 3, 1923, in Clearfield, the daughter of the late George and Ethel (Moore) Waring.
Emily was married to Howard D. McKee, who survives, of Rossiter. They celebrated 66 years of marriage in April.
Mrs. McKee was very active in the Plumville Presbyterian Church and attended the Steffy Church, where she was treasurer/secretary.
She was a treasurer for the Steffy Ladies and secretary/treasurer for the Devers Cemetery Association.
She was a Den Mother for the Cub Scouts, a seamstress and a volunteer for the Plumville Lions Club, where she prepared the dinners.
Her hobbies were quilting, knitting, crocheting and especially fishing.
She loved God and her family.
In addition to her husband, Howard, she is survived by a son, Delbert McKee and wife Corona of Rossiter; a daughter, Kathy Getty of Franklin, Tenn.; three brothers, George "Jim" Waring of Clearfield, Charles Waring and wife Laureen of Clearfield and William Waring and wife Caroline of Curwensville; two sisters, Mary "Tip" Waring of Clearfield and Ginger Swanson and husband Claude of Woodland; four grandchildren, Barbara McKee and husband Ed Sokalski, Justin McKee and wife Stephanie, Nathan Getty and Brian Getty and wife Marie; and nine great-grandchildren.
She was preceded in death by an infant son, Clayton McKee; a sister; Dorothy DuFor; and a great-granddaughter, Tiffany Getty.
Friends will be received from 2 to 6 p.m. Saturday, July 20, 2013, at McCabe Funeral Home in Punxsutawney.
Additional viewing will be held from 1 to 2 p.m. Sunday at the funeral home, where a service will be held at 2 p.m. with Rev. Paul Thompson officiating.
Interment will follow at Devers Cemetery.
Memorial contributions may be made in Mrs. McKee's name to the Steffy Church Memorial Fund, 770 Bonner Rd., Rossiter, PA 15772.
Online condolences may be made at mccabefuneralhomes.com.


text:
Peer Review Process in the Public Sector
The Peer Review Process is an initiative which has been implemented on foot of a Government Decision dated 11th Oct 2005. The Process is applied to major ICT projects in the Irish public sector.
Peer reviews provide assurance that a project can progress successfully to the next stage. More realistic time and cost targets will be secured, knowledge and skills in the public sector will be improved, while those managing projects will get timely, independent advice and guidance.
Reviews are carried out at key decision points of a project, including: the business case; the preparation of the RFT and subsequent tender evaluation exercise; the proposed contract; project initiation; other key milestones in the project cycle as determined by the funding authority and/or the peer review group; and at the project close-out stage.
The Peer Review Process does not override the ultimate decision making and the concomitant accountability arrangements of the sanctioning authority and/or sponsoring Department.


text:
We've compiled a list of all the best iPhone apps for travel - including ones which integrate our seatmaps
Read more
SeatGuru.com was created to help travelers choose the bestairline seats and in-flight amenities. More about us
Copyright © TripAdvisor LLC 2001 - 2018. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy
Terms and Conditions


text:
Hunt Technologies Inc.has introduced the TS2, an exciting new Automatic Meter Reading System that brings the power of endpoint specific data to the entire utility organization. In addition to just bringing information in from the service area, TS2 also allows for simultaneous communications with each individual endpoint throughout the service area, providing unparalleled bi-directional control.
TS2 is the heart of Hunt Technologies' EPIC – End Point Information & Control – solution taking their patented Ultra Narrow Bandwidth technology to the next level providing simultaneous, bi-directional data flow. Each TS2 transceiver has its own unique frequency allowing every endpoint to transmit and receive continuously. TS2 is smart enough to know what each endpoint is doing, where it is switched and how it is configured accommodating dynamic distribution systems with ease.
"The flexibility built into the TS2 system means simple 'plug and play' operation for our customers", states Tom Anderson, COO at Hunt. "Because of our open architecture design, TS2 can interface with any number of data collection devices and software platforms unleashing the powerful information behind each endpoint throughout the entire utility organization. This means enhanced control for our customers and a difference they can see in their bottom line results."
Differences such as enhanced customer service through accurate billing and usage information, reduced system outages with improved system planning based on endpoint specific load analysis, improved maintenance capabilities providing quick identification of outages and swift response to restore service. TS2 provides access to a wealth of information to make more informed decisions leading to increased efficiencies throughout the utility.
To take a closer look at TS2 and the EPIC solution, visit Hunt Technologies on line at www.turtletech.com or call toll free 800-926-6254. You'll see that smarter endpoints are just the beginning.
About Hunt Technologies, Inc.
Hunt Technologies is a Minnesota-based electronic design firm. The company's flagship product is the Turtle Automatic Meter Reading System that remotely reads electric and water meters using its proven, patented Ultra Narrow Bandwidth technology. Hunt is an AMR market leader with more than 2 million Turtle transmitters installed or under contract at 400 projects worldwide.
To receive additional information contained in our TS2 Media Kit, simply contact Vicki Trees at [email protected]


text:
New & NowRicotta
In the Test Kitchen
Yesterday in the test kitchen was busy! You'll be seeing a cavalcade of celery Community Picks so soon, but for now here's a peek into our day:
Once again (remember last time?), the FOOD52 staff proves to be of one mind: our intrepid kitchen manager Jennifer and senior editor Kristen showed up -- surprise -- in matching stripes. Aren't they adorable? On the right, our photographer James Ransom does whatever it takes to get the right photograph. In this case, it's for a Kitchen Storage post next week!
It was a day of snacks. Around lunchtime, we had planned to have ricotta (made by Kristy!) and sea salt on Pane Pugliese from Sullivan Street Bakery. Then came the gamechanger: with lemon zest left over from the kitchen and honey from the pantry, we had salty-sweet-tart toasts instead.
Not too long after, a curiously enormous radish materialized from the kitchen. (Kristy has normal-sized hands -- that radish is big.) Our solution? Slice it with a mandoline and make tartines with radishes, butter, and sea salt.
After a long day of cooking (can you guess what the above mise en place will make?) it was time to clean up. Fortunately, we had the two cutest helpers around -- Walker and Addie! -- and we finished in no time.


text:
NYC Graffiti Tour
New York is known for its substantial art history. But what you may not have known is that the early hip hop community was responsible for much of the underground art that had taken over the urban landscape of New York City.
- Enjoy a 2 hour guided graffiti tour around Harlem
- See the work of local and international artists
- Learn the difference between street art and graffiti
- Amazing photo opportunities
Experience the Graffiti of Harlem
On this NYC Graffiti Tour we'll take you around some of the best examples of street art, graffiti, and mural art in the city. We'll also take you to see where numerous local and international artists in the streets of Harlem showcase their work.
Your guide will also share with you the difference between true street art and graffiti and the 'unwritten rules' of the street art community, so you'll be able to see the 'language' of this art community.
If you're an art lover, graffiti artist, or someone that wants to see a side to street art that few people have experienced, when this tour is for you!
The tour is operated in English.
How do I get my tickets?
Shortly after your booking is complete your e-ticket will be send directly to your email, just print it out and bring it on your tour.
Where does the tour begin?
The tour starts outside Lexington Social. Please be there 15 minutes before the tour starts.
How long does the tour last?
The tour lasts 2 hours.
Are there children's tickets?
Yes, children's tickets are available for children between age 6-18. Children between age 0-5 are free when accompanied by a paying adult.
NYC Graffiti Tour
The meeting point is outside of Lexington Social:
1634 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10029
NYC Graffiti Tour
The tour operates Tuesday at 11 AM.
The closets subway stop is: 110 St.


text:
Mashups made easy
FortiusOne makes it easy for anyone to put a mashup on the map.
(Business 2.0 Magazine) -- Since Google made its maps available for customization last year, savvy programmers have created thriving businesses by adding layers of information.
One example: Hotel World Map. (See correction)
But making these so-called map mashups has been beyond the reach of the average user.
So in May, Washington-based startup FortiusOne launched GeoCommons, a cartographic portal where users can easily create their own mashups.
The site has 2 billion pieces of localized data -- from census figures and school district budgets to water-contamination and traffic-congestion hot spots -- and it is rapidly adding more.
"We've spent a lot of time making the maps and data easy for nontechnical folks to use," says FortiusOne CEO Sean Gorman. "This is really the second generation of map mashups."
Gorman's company is already turning a profit from selling geospatial data to U.S. government agencies.
FortiusOne has done geographic risk analyses for the Department of Homeland Security, which is interested in using GeoCommons to share data in the event of a terrorist attack or natural disaster.
The 14-person company is also selling geodata to real estate companies and environmental groups. It expects to hit $2.5 million in revenue this year.
But Gorman isn't content with simply providing customized maps to the public and private sectors. He wants to grow GeoCommons into a vast social network and make more money selling ads against it.
"It's all about using geographical data to solve problems or tell a story," he says. On the Web, where you are is fast becoming where it's at.
Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated that real estate site Zillow uses Google technology to create map mashups. Zillow uses its own mapping platform. (Return to story)
To send a letter to the editor about this story, click here.
From the July 1, 2007 issue